Talk:Wizard
Should we include the "Hotu-exclusive", "exp-added" notes for the class page spell lists?--Defunc7 00:29, 11 Sep 2005 (PDT) I would think it would start looking messy. The name is wiki'ed to the spell description which has the note about that already. I think that is enough. -- Pstarky 00:38, 11 Sep 2005 (PDT) I agree with Pstarky. -- Austicke 18:39, 11 Sep 2005 (PDT) Moved article from "Wizard" to "Wizard (class)" to disambiguate (what an awful verb!) from toolset wizards. Will fix links to the article, may take some time (there are lots of them). --Llandru 21:14, 2 Oct 2005 (PDT) * I wonder if it would be more appropriate for is to prefix things when doing this. Can you have a comma (,) as part of the article identifier? Or perhaps a dash instead? So we would use Class, Wizard or Class-Wizard instead. This means you prefix the item with what is appropriate be it class, race, spell, etc, etc They then also keep close together because they are all talking about the same concept (ie Class, Wizard is near Class, Sorcerer). Enigmatic 02:22, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *Well I think LLandru just keep it the same as every other Dis. Do you think it a real problem? -- Pstarky 04:49, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *I would just keep the toolset wizards from being ambiguous by naming them by their full names. Item Wizard, Area Wizard, etc. In fact, over in the toolset area that's more or less what we are already doing. 2 GP from Klingon Mage 07:24, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *I think using the toolset wizards' full names is a fine idea, and one that can coexist with the Wizard (class) disambiguation. No need to rename the toolset ones IMO, since the distinctive part of their names is not the "Wizard" part but what they work on ("Item" etc.). For the class, since there was no existing disambiguated class, I followed the standard disambiguation format. One bonus to that format is that, if the ambiguous title is already in case-insensitive search form, the disambiguated article page will be as well. Hope that all makes sense... --Llandru 19:15, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) * Good point. It follows the standards and would be very clear to the reader when they were reading an article and it said "And the Wizard (class) who casted the spell". They have no confusion then as to what is being talked about. Enigmatic 19:21, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *Yes, and if the context is clear, the "(class)" part is easily suppressed (I did most of the fixed links that way, in fact). Now that I think about it, though, if any renaming of the Toolset wizards is necessary, it would probably be to disambiguate the non-"wizard" part. e.g. " Module (toolset wizard)" vs. " Module (definition)". I'm not sure it would be worth the hassle though, I'll leave that decision to those who've actually done some work in the Builder category. ;) --Llandru 19:27, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *I am not so sure there's a distinction. A module is a module. Whether it is from the player perspective or the builder perspective is irrelevant. Thus, on that level at least, one article should suffice. Now as you get into mroe detail, well, thats something I suppose I should take a look at, and I haven't yet. Thanks for the heads up, Llandru! More or less 50 PP from Klingon Mage 20:39, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) * I would have to agree. In the toolset it is actually the Module Wizard, which is extremely clear cut as to exactly what it means and in no way would be confused with a straight out Module. The term "Wizard" however I do see as getting confused. Here I would use the terms "Wizard (class)" and "Wizard (toolset)" which would clearly define the difference between them without a problem. If something has a proper title, especially if that is the title used in the toolset itself, then it should be written as such so that people wanting to look up the name can find it easily. Enigmatic 20:52, 3 Oct 2005 (PDT) *The Module Wizard in the toolset is just one of the wizards. They're listed under the menu "wizards" with each being " wizard" (e.g. items wizard).--Defunc7 08:15, 4 Oct 2005 (PDT) Wizard Table Change Necessary? *That Wizard spell table is really huge, but the layout is the same as is used in the Grimoire and manual so I'm not sure if changing it is a good idea. What do the rest of you think? --Countess Terra 08:10, 9 January 2006 (PST) * I'm not following what you are trying to say. What do you feel needs changing? -- SSB Syrus Greycloak 16:19, 13 January 2006 (PST) *I'm not fond of long pages, so I'm just looking for ways to shorten them. Removing extraneous lists, flipping tables...etc. --Countess Terra 21:32, 13 January 2006 (PST) *My wizard spell progression table at NWN2Wiki manages to fit on one screenNWN2Wiki:Wizard#Spell_progression, I think it's just got a smaller cell-padding. alternately you could move both the spell-progression and spell-list onto seperate pages. I'm not really sure how good an idea it is to seperate them from the wizard page though. NWN2Wiki:Spell_progression is all classes, though I still haven't removed the wizard page copy. --Defunc7 06:27, 14 January 2006 (PST) *Perhaps you could split the spell listing into its own section(s)? SSB Syrus Greycloak 17:45, 14 January 2006 (PST) *I think that would probably be a good start. --Countess Terra 18:54, 14 January 2006 (PST) Bonus Feats - Level 25, 30, 40 *An Epic Wizard gets bonus feats at levels 23, 26, 29, 32, 35, and 38. She does not get bonus feats at levels 25, 30 or 40. --Countess Terra 14:08, 13 January 2006 (PST) Specialist Wizards? When a wizard specialisies in a spell school, they get to prepare extra spells. Is there any relevance or bonus to the school in which they have specialised, other than the prohibition from using spells of the oposite school? EG: Transmutation and Abjuration are both opposed by Conjuration. Is there any difference at all in a wizard specialising in Transmutation from one specialising in Abjuration?